Join us as we welcome our newest Planning Advisor, Peter How! At Plansmith, we’re excited to have such an experienced community banking veteran on staff. Read on to learn about Peter’s career and how his background will add value to our clients’ planning experience.
Easily, the hottest regulatory topic of the past seven years is CECL. On top of the long-term lead up, the regulations and deadlines have changed so many times that many institutions hoped the requirement would disappear altogether. However, as of January 1, 2023, CECL is a reality. So, how confident are you in the solution and CECL reporting tools your bank or credit union have decided to implement?
Establishing and maintaining a sound interest rate risk (IRR) program is crucial to ensure proper balance sheet structure and comply with Regulatory expectations. During my 20+ years as a senior FDIC examiner, I routinely saw organizations experiencing issues with their ALM/IRR practices, ranging from loose misunderstandings of the guidance to critical errors that put the health of the organization at risk. Unfortunately, in my current advisory role, I see the same issues all too often.
About two years ago, I wrote a blog declaring the end to, or “the death of,” Surge Deposits. In that post, I had noted how at the time of, and following the 2007-2009 Great Recession, the banking industry saw a substantial influx of deposits as real estate and equity investors liquidated positions and sought safe places to store their money and ride out the storm. I further noted that as CD rates plummeted during, and following, the economic crisis, CD holders weren’t being provided with any incentive to have their money “locked” into time deposits. As time deposits matured, CD holders routinely moved their balances into more liquid non-maturity deposits (NMDs). These former CD holders were essentially temporarily “parking” their money in NMD accounts, just waiting for CD rates to return to what they believed were more “normal” levels, at which time they’d move the balances back into time deposits.
Are you really planning, or are you just budgeting?
By this I mean, are you filling out the numbers on a spreadsheet or planning the actions needed to make it a reality?
It’s always gratifying when all the numbers come together in a neat package showing expected growth and earnings for next year. And, there were likely many contributors who verbally expressed their goals and plans on how they are going to reach them. The compiled financial targets are then presented to and accepted by the board, and your monthly comparisons begin. Budget “predictions” are compared to reality. Variances from “budget” are explained, and business continues as usual. In essence, that’s budgeting.
Our recent blog discussed Product Profitability, or the process of analyzing your product line by looking at each asset category and adjusting its yield by adding non-interest income, and subtracting applicable loan losses and overhead. The overhead we associated with the asset was its funding liability cost less applicable service charges. This gave us a more heightened awareness of the true earning potential of each earning asset.
Banking is relentless in its daily demand for your time and attention to detail. We know this firsthand, as most of us are former bankers and have been in your shoes.
Stresses around day-to-day responsibilities will never be eliminated, but those associated with your budgeting can be. This is why we built Compass and why you chose us as your software provider.
As increased competition and consolidation challenge the financial industry, your business must continue to adapt using strategies for success, not unlike those of other businesses.
Manufacturing and retail have long used product management techniques to meet competitive pressures for pricing, product planning, and growth strategies. If financial institutions are to survive and prosper in this highly charged competitive environment, management must understand and control all components of profitability. Margin and equity risks have been addressed using regulatory rate shock methodologies, as well as recommended and required stress testing of the loan portfolio, including loan losses. Product profitability combines these concepts with an often-overlooked element of cost – overhead.
Before beginning a budget, finalizing any financial plan, or setting in motion any actions for execution, it is imperative that management knows their cost structure. Armed with this knowledge, the team will be able to identify opportunities, avoid diminishing margins, and provide services in the most efficient way.
With this, then, we advocate using a simple and effective Product Profitability analysis. The necessary detail is easy to obtain and manage within your existing planning processes. To begin, you must assign an overhead cost factor to all interest-bearing product lines. This percentage represents the basis point adjustment deducted from an account’s gross yield. You may use either internal or external data for this measure.
Next, determine if there are there other factors affecting your product line’s interest rate that should be noted. For example, costs associated with Loan Losses or Fees that are associated with this product line, but are recorded separately on your income statement.
The last – but very important – factor remaining is the product line’s repricing frequency. As with all other risk analyses, repricing frequency is key to risk management and match funding analysis. By sorting asset balances by repricing frequency, your baseline is now complete. With these details in hand, you will be ready to build a platform for your analysis. Let’s review.
• Repricing frequency
• Current EOM Balance
• Current Yield (FTE)
• Net Overhead Adjustment
Repeat the same for interest-bearing liabilities.
With this simple-yet-analytically-rich information, you can next build an effective analytical report. Here, there are two methods for presenting the data: Match Funding or Funds Pooling.
The example below illustrates the Match Funding method. This analysis sorts first by repricing frequency of the interest-bearing asset. It then funds the asset with liabilities, also sorted by repricing frequency.
This matching approach groups volumes and rates by the inherent repricing risk embedded in your product line. As part of the liability funding, we’ve also distributed an allocation of Capital, both Risk-Based and Excess Capital, to each asset in the analysis.
A waterfall report is then created, as the liabilities “fill up” the asset category until their volumes are matched, then any remaining balances flow into the next asset category. As the balances are matched, the rates are displayed and adjusted for overhead. Loan yields are further adjusted for Loan Fees, and reduced for anticipated Loan Losses. Liabilities are credited with service charges when applicable and the Net Rate is displayed.
The importance of this approach is to identify each asset’s True Rate and True Cost of funding that activity. This method can bring real insight into the true performance of your product line.
It is not uncommon at this juncture for many to argue with the allocations. If that becomes the case within your financial institution, then we suggest a Funds Pool approach.
Funds Pooling uses the same analytical methodology; however, it consolidates the funding liabilities into a pool. The pool remains consistent for all interest-bearing assets, eliminating arguments about liability allocation.
In either case, the end results are significantly informative to the financial institution, including your management team, Board of Directors, and Examiners. What is the TRUE rate for the asset product category? What is its Return on Equity, and what is its cost per $1 of revenue? These are important insights that should be examined regularly, especially during times of economic shifts such as rising interest rates and inflation.
How to Use This Information: There are three specific uses for product profitability information: to develop product strategies for your marketplace; to improve the pricing of service lines to make them more profitable; and, to ensure profitable increased growth.
I’m often asked, “What are the differences between a plan, a budget, forecasting, reforecasting, what-ifs, and stress testing?” Although some of the actions are similar and often intermingled in conversation, it’s their purpose that defines them. If you’re a client, most even involve similar keystrokes using your Plansmith software navigation; yet each plays a unique role within your organization’s total planning process. Let’s discuss.
To start, everyone’s familiar with a budget, but let’s make sure we see it for what it really is. A budget is a prediction or forecast of a financial position at a set time in the future, typically one year. A budget represents a desired financial outcome and requires consent by your board of directors. Most often a Budget is primarily thought of as cost allocations, but when combined with ideas regarding new business, you will often hear it referred to as a Plan. Once approved, the Budget Plan never changes. It is ‘set in stone’ for the duration of your selected time period.
While the economic environment continues to shift from the effects of COVID-19, financial institutions aren’t out of the woods. As 2022 heats up into the summer months, inflation, rate increases, and an overall sense of uncertainty loom over markets. So, how do you begin to measure the financial impact today’s economy will have on your business? By utilizing a true planning model.
A professional forecasting platform for Budgeting and ALM/IRR adapts to changing conditions. As it is relationship-driven, it can be set to react to environmental changes, including rates. As the rate environment shifts, so should your balance sheet growth and product mix. Planning models help you test the impact of such changes and measure results in minutes, not hours.